“You think you can keep kicking friendly dogs and running to the cops whenever one of them bites you and expect the cops to NEVER get tired of coming to your rescue? (Or that the local P.D. will never run out of money to keep sending out cars.)”

Ummm . . . dogs that bite are, kind of by definition, not friendly. What makes you think the police have the luxury to “get tired” of doing their jobs? That’s just not an excuse people get to use. I imagine that police are uniquely aware of their potential legal liability if someone they have chosen not to help is then seriously injured or dies.

It is telling that you imagine the police to be more sympathetic to the bad dogs than to the victims of dog bites.

“You think you can keep kicking friendly dogs and running to the cops whenever one of them bites you and expect the cops to NEVER get tired of coming to your rescue?”

A dog that is friendly to you/submissive to you does not bite you out of anger or dominance. Some dogs will nip out of terror if you scare them (much more common in small purebred dogs than larger, less inbred breeds). But, a dog that is biting aggressively is not being friendly towards you. Many dogs have an ingroup to whom they act like a pack and are friendly, and an outgroup to whom they act like outsiders. Serious fights in an established dog pack are rare, serious bites against an human pack member should likewise be very rare (even from assertive dogs) if the human outranks other members of the pack. Most violence among dogs intra-pack is putting a pack member back in its place by a higher ranking pack member (most dog violence, period, is between members of different packs and during pack establishment). Challenges to authority happen, but they generally start small and cautious, not big and violent. People usually get bitten by dogs when either a) they are not seen as part of the pack (people are often confused about pack lines and will think that any dog they own or associate with considers them part of the pack, this is not the case) or b) they are seen as a lower ranking pack member (this can happen to those who do not properly display high pack control). Most people who beat their dogs have failed at establishing both of those things, and therefore get bitten.

Also, who calls the cops on their own dog? Generally people handle their own dogs. This is true of abusive owners, who tend to respond to aggression with more abuse as well as nonabusive owners who will respond by appropriate punishments. Usually, when their is police intervention with a violent dog, the dog gets put down if the owners do not fight to protect it.

But for the sake of argument, let’s say Sharon Osbourne is a feminist and did joke about what that psycho woman who butchered that guy. We here (I hope you all don’t mind my speaking for you all) would probably say something like “That’s kind of a shitty, tasteless joke and we don’t condone using violence against men.”

Victoria von Syrus is right right RIGHT with this comment:If someone tries to tell a legitimate joke and it fails to be funny, they usually think the fault is all theirs[…]But if someone says something completely unfunny that is also racist or sexist, and someone else points out the racism/sexism, then the speaker usually gets defensive and angry about people not finding their ‘joke’ utterly hilarious.

Also, please show me any example of MRAs having any sense of humor about themselves. I’m not saying they should–cheerfully accepting insults of your beliefs is actually not something you’re required to do. I’m just saying they shouldn’t hide behind “have a sense of humor!” when they don’t.

ewme, I do not understand your analogy about the dog biting someone. You also didn’t respond to the legitimate question of why the MRM isn’t denouncing the violent extremism from its fringe members. I am left assuming that if it isn’t denounced, then it must be mainstream within the movement. Your rebuttal seems to be a confusing version of “I know you are but what am I?”

Not a double standard, all individuals regardless of ideology, should be laughed at if in a post where they are claiming intellectual superiority they show inferior spelling or knowledge of words and their meaning. It is hilarious irony.

Okay, stepping in for just a sec: I got curious about the “Sharon Osborne mocked the guy whose ex-wife cut off his penis” thing when Sofia listed it as one of her Four Horsemen of the Anti-White-Man Femocalypse (along with commercials portraying men as bad at housework, interracial cuckolding porn, and people being all mean to that poor Breivik fellow). As far as I can tell, it didn’t happen. The only mentions I can find are on MRA blogs, all of which seem to be referring to the same MRA video consisting of out-of-context clips of women being evil.

What seems to have happened is this: back when those revelations about Arnold Schwarzenegger’s secret family came out, Sharon Osbourne raised the ire of MRAs for saying that Maria Shriver should have cut Schwarzenegger’s “willy” off. (Contrary to what guys like NWO will tell you, Osbourne was roundly criticized in the mainstream media for these comments.) When, later, an actual castration case hit the news, a bunch of MRAs demanded that Osbourne apologize because her comments must have inspired it.

It looks like MRAs, never the best fact-checkers on the Internet, conflated the incidents and have now convinced themselves that Osbourne’s comments about Schwarzenegger were about the real-life castration case, which actually happened months later.

Not that it would be surprising if TV talk-show hosts made tasteless jokes about this crime. I’m sure everyone who lived through the ’90s remembers all the horrible Lorena Bobbit jokes, most of them made by people who were not remotely feminist. Even as a teenager, I remember thinking they were ghoulish and sexist.

Well, at least the Bobbit case was a bit more complicated than the recent case, because there were allegations that he had raped her prior to her assaulting/mutilating him (abuse and rape of Lorena by the victim were asserted by the defense at trial as well). If one believes Lorena’s account, there are issues of temporary insanity and/or revenge for actual serious violence to be taken into account. Far less clear cut than the asshole who violently assaults and mutilates her partner due to suspected cheating, like the facts (as far as I am aware) of the recent case.

TimothyMcVeigh murders over 200 men, women and children in OKC. Eric Robert Rudolph plants bombs that kill people at gay bars and the Atlanta Olympics. William Krar stockpiles enough sodium cyanide in Texas to turn a skyscraper into the world’s tallest graveyard. James B. Cummings, a white supremacist backed up by his ten-million-dollar trust fund, assembles the materials necessary to construct a bomb designed to disperse radioactive materials when it explodes and is only stopped when his abused wife puts a bullet in his skull. Scott Roeder walks up behind an unarmed and unsuspecting Dr. George Tiller in church and murders him after years of being steeped in violent anti-choice rhetoric. Kevin William Harpham plants a bomb at the Martin Luther King Jr. Day parade in Spokane this past January and is only thwarted when the remote signal he uses fails to detonate the bomb. After these very recent examples of right-wing violence (plus a whole shit-ton more that I can’t remember off the top of my head), I’m supposed to REALLY be concerned about the possibility of one of my partners cutting my cock off and feeding it to the garbage disposal because, um, feminism or something, an incident about as likely to happen as you winning the Nobel Prize for Applied Physics.

Shit, in at least one of those examples (James B. Cummings), people’s lives were probably SAVED by exactly the kind of woman you’re telling me to worry about. Your entire argument is laughably stupid. You’re expecting me and everyone else to be afraid of the same boogeyman (boogeywoman?) you are and ignore the people who are out there committing or attempting to commit large-scale violence. And all the while, running through your blabbering is a weaselly undercurrent of “You’d better start listening to us, or it’s going to get so bad not even the cops will help you”. You can’t even condemn this shit adequately because it’s what you and others like you WANT. You’re still hoping the threat of more random violence is going to bring the rest of us to heel. Not gonna happen. Unlike Ronny Reagan, we really DON’T negotiate with terrorists.

shaenon, I googled YouTube and found this. (I hope this works, since I’m not sure how to do links here.)

I watched it through, but the pertinent part starts at about 5:00. I am not an MRA, I’m a feminist, and it’s ugly. Sharon Osbourne in particular makes some awful comments and the subject is played for laughs. A couple of the hosts, although they’re also playing it for laughs, mention that it’s wrong. One says that she can only imagine one thing that would cause her to want to do that to a man — I assume she’s talking about rape. Another says that it is sexist, and asks if they’d be laughing about it if a woman had had her breast cut off.

The hosts and many women in the audience are laughing. It’s awful. When I heard about the attack, I winced. If the woman who did it isn’t mentally ill, she certainly deserves a long prison sentence.

Why do misogynist men so often compare men to animals btw? -_- (always when it suits them, since they also tend to go on about how superior and intelligent men are in other cases) Men aren’t dogs. MRAs aren’t dogs… they don’t act on uncontrollable instinct…. they’re human beings. -_- And if dogs attack or hurt human beings, they get put down… no trials… no “innocent until proven guilty”… no police investigations… : Is that rly how EWME and others see themselves and want to be treated? :

I am really fond of dogs. I wish that MRAs had the consistency, good nature, and comparably sensible worldview of the average dog. Besides, dogs are highly trainable and social, which is why they make such good pets.

A snake might be a better analogy, because they are not easily trained to do anything and tend to act out of instinct in all matters. However, even though we do not blame a snake morally for its uncontrollable instincts, we feel free to exterminate and hunt it to protect ourselves from it. That is what follows from an assertion of being an instinctive, not conscious, and dangerous animal. Of course, over here in reality, men are not like snakes, but, you know, that also means they have moral responsiblity (as do people of other genders).

Why do misogynist men so often compare men to animals btw? -_- (always when it suits them, since they also tend to go on about how superior and intelligent men are in other cases) Men aren’t dogs. MRAs aren’t dogs… they don’t act on uncontrollable instinct…. they’re human beings.

No, they’re quite human. There are no real monsters, just human beings who behave monstrously. This is why I try not to speak of people in terms of not being human, beyond the dangerousness of dehumanizing people I disagree with. By ascribing inhumanity to them, it makes them seem anomalous and rare, statistical oddities that happen so infrequently as to be unimportant. They are not.

Pecunium, yeah, I saw that earlier this morning. I could literally trip over a half-dozen stories like that on accident, but we’re supposed to REALLY be worried that one or two incidents is actually the herald of a wave of feminist-inspired castration attacks. And, of course, if we fail to believe this nonsense, it’ll be OUR fault the next time one of these scumbags goes off the rails and kills a bunch of innocent people. The mind doesn’t boggle, it dry-heaves.

We Hunted the Mammoth tracks and mocks the white male rage underlying the rise of Trump and Trumpism. This blog is NOT a safe space; given the subject matter -- misogyny and hate -- there's really no way it could be.